MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>In vitro</i> cardiac performance in triploid brown trout at two acclimation temperatures

2002· article· en· W2149457262 on OpenAlexaff
Carole Mercier, Michael Axelsson, Nathalie Imbert, Guy Claireaux, Christel Lefrançois, Jordi Altimiras, Anthony P. Farrell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRainbow troutRyanodine receptorBrown troutCardiac muscleIsometric exerciseInternal medicineTroutAnaerobic exerciseAcclimatizationMyocyteEndocrinologyFish <Actinopterygii>Endoplasmic reticulumFisheryEcologyPhysiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The maximum values for heart rate ( f H ), stroke volume ( V H ), cardiac output ( Q ) and myocardial power output, measured in vitro with a perfused heart preparation, as well as the isometric force‐frequency relationship for atrial and ventricular muscle strips, in triploid brown trout Salmo trutta were all comparable with established information for diploid rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss . Therefore, it was concluded that triploidy is not associated with a major deficiency in maximum cardiac performance. However, a heightened sensitivity to ryanodine was discovered, which indicated an enhanced role for the sarcoplasmic reticulum in excitation‐contraction coupling in these triploid fish. It is suspected that the enhanced role of the ryanodine receptor may be a cellular compensation related to larger cardiac myocytes. It was also clearly established that there was a plateau in maximum cardiac performance between 14 and 18° C and this plateau might be a contributing factor to the reduced factorial aerobic scope and increased fish mortality observed at 18° C.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207